On Thu, 2011-06-16 at 18:38:52 -0500, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: > Sahil Tandon wrote: > >On Thu, 2011-06-16 at 22:38:41 +0000, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: > > > >>stephen 2011-06-16 22:38:41 UTC > >> > >> FreeBSD ports repository > >> > >> Modified files: > >> astro/orsa Makefile > >> Log: > >> - Track updated dependency > >> - Bump PORTREVISION > > > >Please remember to bump other ports that are affected by the math/GiNaC > >shlib change. > > Already done. The only other port that uses math/GiNaC is > math/octave-forge-symbolic, and that port was updated at the same > time as math/GiNaC.
Really? Then was this wrong a few months ago: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports/2011-March/213042.html > Here is a question. Should I bump portrevision of > math/octave-forge-symbolic anyway? Should one wait a day or so before > committing the bumps to avoid certain "race" conditions with > tinderbox, where it might build the port requiring the dependent > before rebuilding the dependent? I believe shlib-related PORTREVISION bumps should be committed right away. -- Sahil Tandon <sa...@freebsd.org> _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "cvs-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
